Wind Inhomogeneities in Wolf-Rayet Stars. IV. Using Clumps to Probe the Wind Structure in the WC8 Star HD 192103
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the most intensive, high-quality spectroscopic monitoring of optical Wolf-Rayet emission lines ever obtained. The Wolf-Rayet star HD 192103 (=WR 135; subtype WC8) was observed in the 5650-5840 Angstrom regime alternately from both the William Herschel Telescope and the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope. The final data consist of a series of 197 spectra spread over 64 hr, each with a resolving power lambda/Delta lambda similar or equal to 20,000 and a signal-to-noise ratio in the continuum similar or equal to 450 per 3 pixel resolution element. We clearly and unambiguously identify stochastic, structured patterns of intrinsic variability at the 1%-2% level of the line flux in the broad C In lambda 5695 emission line. The lambda 5801/12 doublet emission is also found to be variable at the 0.2%-0.5% level of the line flux. We find a correlation between the variability patterns observed in C III and C rv, which suggests a significant overlap in the emission volumes of these transitions, although C Iv is known to arise somewhat closer to the star. We attempt to reproduce the observed line profile variation patterns using a simple phenomenological model, which assumes the wind to be fully clumped. With a minimal set of assumptions, we are able to reproduce both the shape and the variability in the C III lambda 5696 emission profile. We show that the variability pattern provides constraints on the radial extent of WR 135's wind where C III is produced, as well as on the local wind acceleration rate. However, our simple clump model does not reproduce the lower variability in the C rv doublet unless we assume the C Iv emission to occur in a much larger volume than C III, implying that: significant C Iv emission occurs farther out in the wind than C III. We suggest that while some C Iv emission might occur farther out, possibly because of reionization from shocks, a more likely explanation is that wind clumping significantly increases with distance from the star, leading to larger variability levels in C III, formed farther out than most of C rv. Alternatively, optical depth effects and/or local ionization gradients within clumps could conspire to attenuate clumping effects in the C rv emission line while enhancing them in the C III line.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".